15 Minute Cities: a Case Study in Shanghai, China.

Anyone who has travelled around our beautiful planet, recognises the insanity of attempting to apply a global approach to city or town infrastructure. I have argued, for example how, in our New Zealand context the WEF 15 (or 20) minute city policies are particularly ludicrous because we have virtually no public transport system. 

In this article, I’m using one case study of an SDG project in the Chinese city of Shanghai, to illustrate how far removed from authentic, everyday humanity and workable policies these globalist agendas really are. 

****

“It’s the nature of things” states an AI-generated translation of a Chinese Government news article [propaganda] about these dishonestly-titled ‘Community Gardens’:

“The(se) gardens are an aspect of Shanghai’s 2035 master plan, which aims to make Shanghai one of the best cities in the world on measures like carbon emissions, tree cover, and water quality. By filtering pollutants from the air and water, these communal greenspaces make Shanghai more resilient to the impacts of climate change.” quotes The Nature Conservatory

In propaganda like this, the truth is often ‘between the lines’ – in what is not said. For instance, as I’ll explain, this project has a decades-long history. One clue is found in the fact this stretch of land is located in an area of Shanghai with a population density with over 3,000 people per square km. In contrast, the average density of the UK’s population is 283 people per sq km. (In NZ it’s a fraction of that).

Just as journalist’s visas reporting about China have to abide by certain criteria, the challenges for registered NGOs in China are their obligations to adhere to strict Government regulations. China’s PR machinery is keen to control the narrative and prevent publication of any negative aspects of their ‘flourishing city’ Shanghai. After all, this is the centre of AI innovation and intellectual property entrepreneurship. Any articles raising awareness of the high levels of air pollution around the area, are often censored, but here are some facts:

Similarly, it seems the toxic contamination of this Community Garden’s soil - which used to be a landfill site - has been conveniently memory-holed (more on this in a moment).

We can see evidence of the propaganda in academic articles about this space, like this one:

FROM EDIBLE LANDSCAPE TO VITAL COMMUNITIES: CLOVER NATURE SCHOOL COMMUNITY GARDENS IN SHANGHAI.

Keywords: Community Garden; Edible Landscape; Urban Renewal; Public Participation

This paper discusses the possibility and direction of public participation and edible landscape construction in China’s high-density metropolitan areas. It is based on the different types of community gardens completed by Shanghai Clover Nature School Teenager Nature Experience Service Center in recent years under the concept of “Urban Permaculture”. By endowing rights to the inhabitants of the community, these examples have helped the participants become owners and established cooperation mechanisms between government, enterprises, social organizations, and the public. [source]

Notice the propaganda tool used throughout this extract to conjure-up positive images. Words are hijacked: this ‘garden’ is far from any ‘edible’ landscape (not a healthy one, anyway); this is not genuine ‘permaculture’ with nutrient-rich produce using holistic ecologies. 

And when the academic authors state “participants (not residents, after all this is a global experiment) become owners” what do they mean exactly? They are not owners of this space in the true definition – they can’t control its management or access - the same probably applies for their nearby high-rise apartment homes. 

“You will own nothing and be happy!”

Now, I’m not disputing this project has provided lots of benefits for many Chinese residents (and tourists too). Everyone knows that getting out into nature (no matter how limited in clean air, space, time or diversity that nature is), is fundamentally good for our souls. This was reflected in quotes from the residents nearby this project:

“Living in the city, we tend to feel lonely - though we are in the midst of so many people,” she explained. “The garden allows us to gather together and improves the neighborhood.”

That is reassuring to read. But a scratch below the surface reveals some troubling facts about this ‘community garden’. Who initiated the project and why? Is this really what local residents want and need? Were they consulted (respectfully) about the design, content or management of this space? Or are these citizens just too busy working, trying to keep a roof above their heads and food on the table for their families?

Reading the academic articles about this project reveals the ground beneath this ‘garden’ (and others) was previously a toxic dump - it is therefore highly likely to be contaminated with all kinds of toxic forever chemicals, plastic waste and heavy metals. Was the earth tested independently, removed and disposed of safely (if necessary) and healthy soil and materials imported? 

As we can see from the chart above, the air in Shanghai is heavily polluted with the transport, construction and industrial waste expelled from the surrounding heavy industries. Is there any work or funding to address the root cause of these public health hazards? 

In the air just above this ‘community garden’ in Shangahi are thousands of enormous, constantly buzzing high-voltage power cables, Wi-Fi transmitters, conductors and other harmful emissions; are there any plans to reduce or re-route these dangerous sources of disease-causing pollutants?

• I think we can all guess the answers to these questions.

To dig a little deeper with this case-study, let’s look at who or what is behind this ‘community garden’ project. It won’t be any surprise to discover it’s those ‘experts’ at a Chinese university along with Public Private (Philanthropath) Partnerships.

Tongji University – Germany/China

This pseudo-community garden case-study makes more sense when we read some context alongside facts about the tightly-controlled NGO coordinating it. The academic research partner, Tongji University is where the lead author Prof Liu is based (he was asked for comment before I published this article, but did not respond). This University is heavily invested in BigPharma, with its own affiliated hospitals (one in Wuhan) and partnered with the United Nations SDGs (3 mins):

And then we learn this University’s historical, European connections…:

“… began in 1907 with the Tongji German Medical School founded by German physician Erich Paulun with the support of the Chinese and German governments and all sectors of society. In 1912, together with the recently founded Tongji German Medical School. It was taken over by the Chinese in 1917 and renamed Tongji Medical School and Private Tongji Medical College. It was named Tongji University in 1923 and became a national university in 1927.” [source] 

&“Erich Wilfried Reuleaux (1883-1967), [was] a German Professor for Engineering at TH Darmstadt and University Rector in the academic year 1931/32. In 1934, he accepted a professorship at Tongji University. He became Dean of the Department of Engineering and an advisor to the Chinese government.” [source]

The Chinese Government funding academics who are advising that Government – sound familiar? The partnerships with Germany strengthened when in 1980, Technical University Darmstadt partnered with Tongji Uni. The primary investor in the University’s research funds seems to also be a past CEO of Bayer, China. And Asklepios, the largest private German healthcare provider, is also one of their major funders.

And after describing this case-study, readers won’t be surprised at happened to these ‘Community Gardens’ during the covid era lockdowns? Yup. Government policy ensured they were CLOSED. This nonsensical restriction must have been heartbreaking for the residents in the apartment blocks around this space.

And finally…

The whole concept of 15-min cities assumes citizens are passive - sub/consciously coerced (or willing) to participate in the never-ending treadmill of work/eat/sleep/work. As one of the participants said:

“…many people caught-up in fast-paced lives, hectic work schedules and crowded living environments yearn for the tranquility of nature and a sense of belonging. The garden brings those benefits to the doorsteps.”

Well, I’m not sure those high expectations are realistic within Shanghai? Only prioritising our own health and wellbeing, escaping our slavery to the system, can create genuine community gardens - ones that are NOT predetermined and controlled by nefarious, unelected, unaccountable entities with unethical agendas - in China or any country.

Want to “DO SOMETHING” about this? In the UK, check out your local Council Watch - very inspirational groups exposing the skullduggery of these UN SDG puppets. Here in New Zealand we have CityWatchNZ, which has valuable information about the similar, creeping changes towards a ‘20 Minute City’ for Hamilton. 

For weekly articles like this, subscribe for free at:  ursulaedgington.com